Spyckie

Won't this just make consumers hurt at the end? The most reasonable option as a developer is just to mark up the prices by 30% and then say if you want it the normal price, too bad - Apple needs its cut.

:) rant appreciated. I actually harbor the same suspicions, but for the sake of general understanding it was the best way I could frame the issue.

Sorry, this is not your type then. I would definitely spend some more time to look into the applicant.

Yes, for pure coders, this is a terrible resume. It looks like she is using the right side of the brain for something left-sided. But, that's the point.

How many coders do you know can show an interest in both design and code (same for designers)? To have an aptitude and interest in both code and design is something very hard to find, and to be able to express the fusion of the two is a challenging process for many who are aching to stretch the boundary set by text heavy, information-only resumes that do not communicate nearly what you want it to. (How much design skill, creativity, and passion can you communicate with just information?)

Yes, I would never hire her for algorithm optimization, but if she was building a website that doesn't innovate technologically but rather creates social, cultural, aesthetic or other value (which the majority of startups do) - I would take a second look.

For what its worth though, I do think the graphs are a little hard to read but not hard to navigate, especially if I'm looking for a particular skill to hire for. Its easy to see if she has Ruby skills, for instance - but its hard to see the overall picture of what skills she has without spending a lot of time on it.

Its missing the social aspect right now - I can't find anyone (much less my friends).

Figuring out yourself is probably the best thing that you can do. A lot of people have the thought that their potential is limitless - this is wrong and dangerous if you equate happiness with fulfilling your potential.

What helped me a lot is learning my personality type based on the MBTI model (or any model, they're all pretty similar) - study it and find out your potential compared to other types. This gives you a more accurate scale to view your potential, and a more accurate scale will give you a more well defined measurement of success.

For instance, personality typing predicts varying degrees of hard-workingness based on nothing else but your disposition. A lot of people can't accept this even though life itself seems to indicate it and have wrong expectations for themselves. This is very unhealthy if you put all your hopes here and can't manage to fulfill it.

I already wrote my thoughts on this here: therubyway.wordpress.com/2010/07/09/how-to-view-yourself/

I used to play with scratch to test it out. I really like it - it is a real programming language, but the big difference is that the blocks tell you all the options you can do while a text editor only shows you white space. The blocks also enforce syntax (prevent spelling/usage errors) and allow you to witness the execution of the program step-by-step (see how your program runs).

I think most of the mental barriers and frustrations of learning a new programming language is not knowing what you can do with it, not knowing the right syntax, or not knowing what the program is doing during execution - the block interface removes most of these problems while still preserving a programmer's mindset. Hopefully this will convince some of the 'hardcore' programmers that it is a legitimate language, even if developing with it is a bit slower than typing.

I haven't played with it for a while - they were planning to add function blocks, but I don't know if they did.

Also - lots of kids actually have played with scratch. If you look at the website, there are 1.1 million projects and 150,000 members. So - this next generation is really poised to make this platform their own. Maybe it will be their TI-83?

The git or mercurial teams should build a Google Wave robot that comes with the software. Not because I want them to, but because its a killer feature. :)

Also for syntax highlighting - take a look at codemirror. I've used it before and have been very satisfied with its performance and functionality.

I had a similar idea, but create the whole IDE on wave. Several advantages:

1) Programmable - you can add in functionality to the IDE much more easily by adding gadgets or even robots.

2) It gets rid of the concept of 'local copy' altogether, and makes your development project accessible from anywhere by anyone. It also means that you only have to set up one test environment rather than everyone's local environment.

3) You can have as many test servers or production servers as you want. One robot to manage multiple servers at once. This robot is essentially a remote command line connected to serveral test/production servers. This makes cheap servers (100$ wall servers anyone?) useful.

Try PhoneGap or Titanium Mobile. Both of them use Javascript, HTML, and CSS to build apps that can be run on both phones and have access to the native controls.

This observed pattern can be described by personality typing. I like to think of it as 2 classifications of how our brain explores - depth-based vs breadth-based search. Problem solving vs random walk. Directed vs discovered. Convergent vs divergent, etc. Essentially, one type enjoys digger deeper (defined by getting closer towards a goal) into a topic, while another enjoys expanding outward (exploring a topic, no goal required).

The majority of people enjoy doing one type of thinking and hate doing the other, which causes this culture difference. Depending on the class of problems that a field has to tackle, the community may be dominant in one or the other. Mathematics is a field in which a random walk style of exploration can yield fascinating results, while an engineering field is much more likely to benefit from a focused approach. Usually, the type of thinking that yields more results becomes dominant in the community and gets the right to snub the other.

The difference and contention, I think, arises purely out of the dislike of doing the type of thinking that you're not naturally inclined to. This dislike is rooted in unfamiliarity and a strong sense of worth that parallels our inclinations. The contention is rarely settled by arguments of logic, efficiency or practicality - it is not that people don't believe in logic, but rather because the arguments don't address the core issue. The core issue is our natural inclinations, which at its roots, are innate or at least solidly ingrained in us by the end of childhood.

Or an open source alternative?

It looks like flowplayer built custom animations for themselves and decided to release it as a library. Good publicity and a well designed website.

I think the library itself has great video support but not much else.

"Seeing you type" is the same thing as talking - only introverts don't like other people seeing their thoughts, while extroverts prefer it. The thing is, extroverts comprise the majority of the population. Also, while seeing you type may not be preferred in conversation, it will be preferred in a document collaboration environment.

The robot thing is not inane because it is part of the distributed/federated document editing, and it has media elements attached to it rather than just text. In IRC, you only talk to people for the most part, so bots in IRC are centered around facilitating that purpose. With Wave, you talk, work, and plan with data that can take any form - a much broader scope that allows robots to do much more than just 'user logged in, user logged out'.

The reason why I think it is a strong alternative to project collaboration tools is because of 'see as you type' and its robot capabilities. Yes, it has a nice document model, but that isn't the key feature for me.